NSC advisors urged ‘ISIS’-style drone attacks on Russian rail, leaked files show

Leaked war plans sent to the US NSC instructed Kiev to carry out “ISIS”-style drone attacks on Russian trains and rail bridges, foreshadowing a series of deadly Ukrainian attacks this May and June.

By Kit Klarenberg

A coterie of British and American academics advising the US National Security Council explicitly urged Ukraine adopt the tactics of ISIS in a detailed proposal for “anti-rail drone operations,” according to leaked documents reviewed by The Grayzone.

The aggressive war plans recommended in the files eerily foreshadowed Ukraine’s Operation Spider Web, which consisted of a series of brazen drone attacks waged inside Russia between May 24 and June 1 – the eve of scheduled negotiations between Russia and Ukraine. A pair of Ukrainian bombings of Russian trains in Bryansk on May 31 and Kursk and the following day left seven dead, and injured more than 30 people, including two children.

The attacks on Russian rail infrastructure have continued since the launch of Operation Spiderweb, suggesting the British-born strategy has heavily influenced the thinking of Kiev’s increasingly desperate military.

The leaked plans reviewed by The Grayzone explore the use of “inexpensive drones” as “a low-cost means for disrupting Russian logistics,” but also include blueprints for terror attacks composed by three “drone experts” before being passed to the Biden administration’s then-Director for Russia at the National Council, Col. Tim Wright.

Those experts belonged to a secret academic-intelligence cell called Project Alchemy, whose existence was first exposed by The Grayzone, and which was founded with a mission to “to keep Ukraine fighting” by imposing “strategic dilemmas, costs and frictions upon Russia.”

As previously reported here, Project Alchemy researchers called “to take a page from ISIS’ playbook,” presenting the jihadist group’s psychological operations as a model for Ukrainian attacks on Russian civilians. The Grayzone can now reveal that Alchemy’s team also urged US war planners to look to the Islamic State for inspiration in using commercial drones for attacks on Russian civilian targets.

One academic advising the Alchemy cell, Zachary Kallenborn of George Mason University, recommended Ukraine carry out “two-stage attacks like ISIS did frequently” on Russian-held railways, suggesting that Kiev first “break the track, and wait for the engineers to come to fix it, then use the drone to kill them.” In other words: double tap kamikaze drone strikes.

“Drones also could provide ISR [intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance] in finding and tracking trains to support larger actions,” with satellite imagery exploited for targeting purposes, Kallenborn added.

An unnamed Durham University researcher consulted by the NSC declared that “ISIS showed in their battles against the Iraqi military” that drones could be “modified via a simple drop mechanism… to serve as effective munitions delivery platforms.” The conversion of everyday commercial drones into munitions-bearing killing machines would prove one of the most deadly tactics of the war for both sides.

The origin of Kiev’s ‘drone swarm’ offensives?

During a meeting between military historians from Kansas State University and faculty from the Command and General Staff School at Ft. Leavenworth, academic war planners discussed “the idea of using inexpensive drones to prevent Russia from using captured Ukrainian railroads to resupply their combat units.” The academics then delivered the proposal to “three drone experts in the Ukraine Working Group who each provided their analysis for how to achieve this.”

A separate leaked document describes the Working Group as a vast collection of “strategic studies, military technology and Eastern Europe regional studies experts” who “came together to analyze the Russian invasion of Ukraine and to think deeply about policy options” which could “assist Ukraine’s defense (short of deploying combat forces).” The Working Group was composed of “approximately 60 experts hailing from states throughout NATO.”

The operations file begins by noting that, “when operating in its own territory,” the Russian army “relies on its well-developed rail system which is integrated with Ukraine’s domestic rail network.” As Russian forces moved deeper into Ukraine, the Working Group forecasted that they would “increasingly need to rely on Ukraine’s rail system or face logistic-induced paralysis as their lines of supply lengthen and their road-based logistical become increasingly inefficient.”

“The question should therefore be posed as to whether inexpensive drones can be used to hinder Russian efforts to use those portions of Ukraine’s railway network they have captured,” the document stated. An academic using the initials “M.E.D.” who hailed from Britain’s prestigious Durham University declared, “if Ukrainian forces could sustain attacks on occupied railroads, they could hamper Russian forces’ ability to operate deeper inside of Ukraine.”

While believing it “unlikely that drone attacks, even kamikaze attacks, could bring down bridges” – although this “would be ideal” – they suggested “commercial drones could be modified with a sufficient explosive to inflict meaningful damage of railroads, it would greatly complicate Russian efforts.” After all, “even a small amount of damage would force rail traffic to stop until repairs could be made to the line.”

These attacks “could be carried out away from major stations likely to have active air defenses,” and “augment attacks by stay-behind guerrilla forces.” M.E.D. cited a July 2018 paper on Islamic State’s “innovative” use of drones published by the West Point military academy’s “combating terrorism center” as a reference point for such tactics. It discussed “creative ways” ISIS had deployed “simple, low-cost, and replaceable devices” to devastating effect against its adversaries, which could be replicated by the US and its allies.

M.E.D. postulated that “if larger drones could be procured, of if light commercial aircraft could be modified to fly as drones, they might be able to damage rail bridges enough to force substantive repairs, which would greatly slow rail traffic” – a proposal which closely resembles the June 1 attacks on rail bridges in Russia’s Bryansk and Kursk regions. “Another possibility” was “to use a number of commercial drones in a swarm attack” comparable to Ansar Allah’s September 2019 strikes on Aramco sites in Saudi Arabia, “wherein a number of thermite munitions are used to weaken steel or concrete infrastructure.”

“Even if the rail bridges are not destroyed outright weakening key areas – perhaps through the use of suicide drones striking them directly after triggering their payload – would necessitate close inspection and hinder the ability to use the bridges safely,” M.E.D. concluded. Throughout the proxy war, Ukraine has regularly deployed drone swarms against Russian targets, in some cases inflicting significant damage.

“Track switches would probably be good targets too”

Another “drone expert” consulted by the St. Andrews cabal was Dominika Kunertove, formerly of Swiss university ETH Zurich’s Center for Security Studies. Kunertove currently serves as director of “a research project on future drone warfare and technology” at the Atlantic Council, the semi-official, arms-industry funded think tank of NATO in Washington DC.

Kunertove suggested using drones to strike “anything that uses” railroads, rather than railways themselves, as this would mean “neither side would be able to use railroads for some time (in case [Ukraine] recaptures…territory previously held by Russians.” This June, Kiev destroyed a military supply train carrying heavy armor, including tanks and artillery systems in an effort dubbed Operation Spiderweb 2.0.

Meanwhile, Zachary Kallenborn, a self-described “war doctor in training” from George Mason University’s Schar School, noted the “limited payloads” offered by commercial drones, with “only a few pounds” of explosive able to be attached to them, meant “the best bet would be to hit sensitive, difficult to repair targets to maximize harm.” While admitting to “not know too much about rail infrastructure,” he suggested “switching yards, engine houses, or the equipment to load and unload trains” as prospective targets.

“Track switches would probably be good targets too,” Kallenborn said, as “a hit would disrupt multiple lines and…would be tougher to repair.” He went on to advocate “[thinking] about how drones can support broader anti-rail operations.” While “slowing” operations intended were “definitely good,” Kallenborn believed it would be “be more useful to use drones” to target “supply trains themselves,” echoing Dominika Kunertove’s suggestions.

Kallenborn specifically highlighted five commercial drone models which could be outfitted with explosives and sent to disrupt rail operations, including the $2,200 DJI Mavic III, which Ukrainian forces used in their attack on a Russian fuel train this May 24.

“All of these would need to be modified to allow carrying and dropping of any munitions, which will increase the cost,” Kallenborn wrote. But “depending on model, there may be secondary suppliers who can help with that,” he noted.

Still, Kallenborn appeared to express some cynicism about the utility of drones. He urged the National Security Council to “consider the opportunity cost of drones vs other approaches.” He speculated there were “probably a lot of tracks… in relatively isolated areas where planting explosives by hand might be plausible and might be better timed to fix a train.”

That task that could be handily carried out by secret Operation Gladio-style “stay-behind guerrilla forces” which other British academics proposed standing up as part of a proposal to strike “sensitive, difficult to repair targets to maximize harm” in Russian territory.

In the face of constant Russian battlefield gains and a looming reduction in Washington’s military aid to Ukraine, the British government remains committed to spending vast sums on ensuring Kiev has a vast supply of drones at its disposal at all times.

As Ukraine places drone attacks on Russian infrastructure at the heart of its increasingly desperate strategy, Project Alchemy’s ISIS-inspired plans are more relevant than ever.